Teale's 'tache

It's cost, I read somewhere a total rebrand would cost in the region of £10m, an evolution where you don't have to change everything can be rolled out more to whatever budgetary constraints you have at the time. You can believe whatever you want though and get angry at Heck, I'm just not sure you're being angry for the right reasons.

I was going to wait for the official announcement, but it's taking too long and I want to give my thoughts on the 'leaked' crest and how I think we've arrived at it. My initial thought when seeing the crest was that this is now an evolution of the Lerner brand and not the complete rebrand we'd been expecting. A brand evolution essentially means changing only a few components, slightly, so that at a glance you don't notice any difference, this means you don't have to pull down every version of the old crest in one summer and can instead do it gradually over a period of time. In this case, they've 'improved' the shield shape and the lettering, but taken care to keep the colours, lion and star as they were. The old lion and star in particular have been used in quite a bit of branding since Heck came in and because they haven't changed all of that branding can stay as is. So for those asking 'Why do we still have yellow on blue?' or 'Why have we gone back to the old lion?' That's your answer. Essentially it's about money. Heck came in with the remit to make/save money, he saw what the rebrand project was going to cost and decided that an evolution was more financially viable than a complete rebrand, he may have loved the roundel design, he may have hated it, but the reason it was canned was financial by the looks and nothing to do with preference. Now, if you look at the design, knowing the designer couldn't change the lion or star, and couldn't change the colours, and also had to fulfil the demands of the questionnaire, then it begins to make a little more sense how this design has been produced. I have great sympathy for the designer, this was mission impossible. It's a cautionary tale of how bad design decisions can hang around like a bad smell, 16/17 years we've had the yellow on blue, and until we suck it up and pay for a full rebrand there it will remain, the drop shadow doesn't fix it, but it does improve it ever so slightly. I don't really mind if the lettering is top or bottom because it can look unbalanced either way, the white text on the light blue is rubbish though. I'm just very disappointed, in the club and how they've communicated the whole thing, and the fact we aren't getting the total rebrand we desperately need. As I and others in here have shown, we could have had a really nice brand, that would have made it a whole lot easier to sell ourselves to new fans, investors, partners .etc Instead, we just plod along with the same broken brand. Womp womp.

Oh no offense taken at all, and yeah if this was the crest you could absolutely expand on the gaslamp shape, I can imagine numerous ways it could be incorporated into a brand

Here's the thing, you don't have to get it. It doesn't have to be recognisable as a gaslamp shape. It would be a shape that is unique to us, that nobody else will use. It makes us instantly recognisable and has a meaning for those who want it to have meaning. It works for those who love all the heritage stuff and for those who know nothing about us, having a unique shape will help us to stand out from the crowd.

One last time before this sorry saga is over (for now...) Done a little more work on the gaslamp version and how it would work in a brand. Works on any background... Works in monochrome... Has different components that can be used individually across a brand... Looks good on a kit... And as someone previously mentioned, the unique gaslamp shape can be used in the brand as well... (forgive the Watkins image being old, knocked this up in a rush) This is the kind of thing I was hoping for, by the looks I'm going to be very disappointed

I believe @OutByEaster? has already stated that the consultation rules were met, it may have been the minimum required, but they were met all the same, the MOMS guy is just blowing smoke for engagement. If this is indeed going to be the new crest the fans really don't have too much of an argument, it is obviously a villa crest and has all the ingredients the fans voted for in the survey, they've not done anything radically different enough for the FA to be interested, there's nothing there that it is against our heritage. The rules are in place to stop the owners adding a unicorn pooping rainbows to our crest, not to step in because they haven't changed the colours. I'll give my thoughts on this crest if/when it's confirmed, and try and explain some of the thought process behind it.

I like the idea of using the gaslamp to break up the circle, very inventive. However, I prefered the previous colour scheme, I don't believe we have to have quite so much blue, and I don't like how the gaslamp and inner circle now make up the shape of a bauble, which I now can't unsee. Really good effort though!

Can confirm, I'm a professional designer and have dropped some colossal cojones in my time. Though, I've always generally worked solo and not as part of a team. I'd expect there to be a whole team working on this, so it must have gone through multiple sets of 'fresh eyes', to not have been corrected and made more legible isn't a great sign. However, I do reserve judgment until we see the rest of the branding and how it's used.

Which is in itself a change...

It does feel like we are approaching somewhat of a crossroads when it comes to Villa Park. Ideally, I think the owners would like us to stay where we are and have always been careful not to trample on traditions or take anything away from our club's identity. At the same time, they must know that to compete off the pitch we need our stadium to be more profitable, both on matchdays and all year around, the capacity has to increase and more corporate spaces created, to do that and for it all to be feasible it will also need to be more accessible than it currently is. Is our location holding us back? Can we create the facility we need in the space we currently have? Can we afford to lose revenue while development takes place? I don't know. It's all very much up for debate. However, I don't think the North Stand update alone was ever going to solve all of the issues or future-proof the stadium for where we intend to be. Maybe there are grander plans afoot? Like the Bernabeu with its disappearing pitch and closing roof, imagine the events they can hold there, and the additional revenue it will attract. As others have said the ability to easily host other sporting events like NFL and MLB games brings in plenty of coin, concerts the same, it all adds up. I love a brick facade as much as the next man, I love our stadium. But football has long become a business as much as a sport, and if you want to compete with the big boys you simply have to do so on and off the pitch. Change is coming one way or another, whether you or I like it or not.

I agree, quite like the style but the execution could be better, it's always a difficult balance with that type of font style, but it should be a little more obvious what the letters should be. I don't want to judge too much until I've seen the rest of the brand though, out of context a marque on its own can be misleading, not sure the thinking behind leading with it, first impressions are important.

Seems to be a bit of misunderstanding going on here, this is a marque, it is not a logo or a badge, a marque is an icon used as part of a brand, it doesn't have to have letters let alone the full name. This would likely be used as a detail on a shirt or other apparel, in places too small to accommodate the full logo, in places where maybe the shape of the full logo wouldn't work, and just generally used within the brand where needed.

Although there are many obvious benefits to a new stadium, I don't believe that's the plan going forward, I'd imagine it's a last-case scenario option. You don't spend millions on an inner-city academy down the road, add loads of corporate areas to the stadium, double the size of the club shop, and develop the Warehouse stuff to then immediately uproot and move elsewhere. It just wouldn't make sense. That is not what we are looking at right now. But transport is very much a big issue, you can spend as much as you want on the stadium and its facilities, but there's a finite amount of people you can reasonably get in and out of the area in a sensible amount of time, adding 10k more people to that has a big impact and would detract from the matchday experience for everyone. Transport into the area simply has to be improved if we want to grow, and that's where the bottleneck is. I don't think it's a lack of demand, it's a logistical problem that is not easily fixed. The landscape has changed regarding the council since Purslow originally drew up these plans, and how the situation evolves depends on how or what we can do to improve transport under this new landscape. The new North Stand was going to add loads more corporate areas, which Heck absolutely wants, but there's no point adding more corporate if it's incredibly inconvenient to get to and from, it's hard to sell an 'experience' if you have to tell people to allow for multiple hours travel and waiting around. Throw in that we are way ahead of schedule on the pitch, and now have more investment joining us, and it begins to make a bit more sense as to why we are having a pause and rethinking how we can best move forward. It may well still go ahead, we just have to be sure logistically it will work as intended so that the considerable investment has appropriate returns. If there really is no way forward in terms of improving the transport links, and we continue on our current trajectory, then somewhere down the line the new stadium idea would become a more viable option to break the impasse. The owners, up until now, have shown no interest in going against our traditions as a club, moving away from our home would be a huge breakaway from that, but if it stunts our growth and their investment, then it is only natural a move would at least come under consideration.

Indeed, I wonder if the opportunity for extra investment may have led to a rethink, and the scope of the project increased. It's a project that has had pretty obvious obstacles from the start in terms of transport, logistics, the loss of revenue whilst it is completed, and none of these issues seem to have been overcome as of yet. It's frustrating, but it's a massive project and unfortunately, massive projects are often subjected to multiple delays and changes.

Interview with Heck up on AVTV https://www.avfc.co.uk/news/2023/december/19/chris-heck-interview/

I've never been a huge fan of Frank, just always seemed very much in love with himself, but I can respect the job he's done at Brentford and I can appreciate that he went to speak to Ollie after the game as he knew something must have happened to cause the celebration so out of character for him. However, I think it is really very poor that he refuses to condemn the challenge by Mee, were the challenge on one of his players I'm sure we'd be hearing an entirely different tune coming from him, and this is a problem I have with quite a few of the managers at the moment. They are so quick to criticise officials or opposition players and so loathe to admit any fault of themselves or their own players, even incredibly obvious ones. His reaction to the red card was incredibly petulant and began a sour mood over the rest of the game. We've said it recently about Arteta, players see how their managers act and will copy that behavior. If it was a bad decision, then you could maybe understand, but even given the time to have seen replays, to have seen what his own behavior later caused, he still won't accept that a high, over-the-ball, studs-up challenge is a red card. He's arguing that black is white to save face, it's childish, and too many managers have been employing this kind of tactic for way too long. It encourages more bad challenges and it continues to make the official's job more difficult. Managers should own what their teams do out there on the pitch and stop trying to throw everyone else under the bus to distract from their failings. They need to grow up and be the adults in the room that they are supposed to be. Anyway, another great result in the end, performance was okay I thought considering the players we were missing, I'm trying not to let the late stupidity ruin the result, I can't blame a few players for getting a bit excited considering where we are, Emery has already said he's going to look at and correct it and I have every faith that he will do just that.

I think when you talk about physicality in football, players tend to fall into three main categories. 1. Those who want to dominate their opposition using physicality as their primary weapon. 2. Those who will use physicality when it is required, but primarily look to dominate in other ways. 3. Those who actively try to avoid physical battles on the pitch and use other skills to impact a game. Most of our players fall into the second category I'd say, and I think Watkins is a very good example of this. He's capable of engaging with defenders in physical battles when the situation is beneficial, but he doesn't spend the whole game on his marker's toes like say Shearer or Duncan Ferguson would back in the day, or Carew or Benteke would for us. Even Mings who's not shy of a physical tussle would try to be involved only when the situation suited us, as he had other responsibilities. I think tactically nowadays you can't just go and have a physical battle with your opposite number all game anymore, formations are so fluid and situations change so rapidly that you end up engaging with multiple different players at any one time. As a forward if you get sucked into scrapping with a center half all game then you run the risk of being easily contained, and a defender who does the same is no longer covering for their fellow defenders. Tactically every player is needed. Really, every player at the top level now is an athlete and will look to use whatever physical attributes they have to their advantage in any given situation. Most players are strong enough to hold off another player, but it's not just strength, often being balanced is just as important. So when people say 'he's easily knocked off the ball' it's not always down to how 'strong' they are, but more they keep finding themselves off balance and unable to use their strength. When we talk about reading the game, the advantage that can give you is a split second more to get yourself balanced and in the correct position to engage in a physical battle. I think you need a certain mentality to read the game in this way, to have this particular kind of anticipation, this is what I believe @TRO wants more of in our team, for us to become more robust. I think all of our players are capable, some more than others, but a little more certainly wouldn't hurt.

I'll be very interested to see how we approach the upcoming window, a lot may still depend on how we do in the fixtures leading up to January, and where we find ourselves in the table. There will be a temptation to go out and try to take advantage of a lofty league position and try to add some real quality while the going is good, though January is often not the optimum time to make those kinds of signings, teams don't like losing quality players mid-season so it can be difficult. Also going big in January would have a knock-on effect for the summer window when more quality may be available, so it's not a straightforward decision to go this route. I can see the argument for no incomings at all, if we don't see anything available that would improve us on terms we like, then we have a decent and practically full squad with some good players coming back from injury. Yes, there are a few gaps, but we've managed admirably so far, and making signings for the sake of it rarely ends well. I don't think we'll be signing 5 or 6, when Mings and Buendia are back fit next Summer there really is little room left in the squad without some outgoings, there are a few we'd like to move on I think and January can be an opportunity to take advantage of others desperation in that regard, though I don't see the likes of Luton, Burnley, Everton, etc. chucking a load of money at us for our fringe players. We have to be careful not to leave ourselves short with so many games left to go as well. I think 1 or 2 most likely, we need to complement what we have that is working right now. As others have said, a right-sided defender is probably the most likely position we are looking at, to rotate with Cash, though possibly with different characteristics to give Emery another option. I'm sure we are tracking plenty of players, but as always comes down to what is available and is at a cost we agree with. I wouldn't be surprised if there were a few academy-type signings, looking to the future is an important part of any transfer strategy.

I think the point I was trying to make is that you're never going to be completely perfect, where you can dominate every single team for every minute of every game, home and away. If Man City cannot do it with the best players and best coach in the world then it's unlikely to ever be done. It is just not achievable, and so quite rightly we can be pragmatic and make room for those spells in our planning, which I believe Emery does. I have no problem with those calling for improvement when we win, looking for areas we may have been lacking, it's the demanding of the impossible I think is taking it a bit far. It's the same with transfers sometimes, the demands for each one to be perfect are not based on reality. I think we agree on where the improvements need to be made, how we improve them may vary, more press-resistant players would certainly help, quicker movement/communication and options provided by the team as a whole could help also, and dare I say it also be a bit smarter and know when to soak up a bit of time and take the pressure off (Martinez excluded). Away from home is always a tricky setup, I don't think there's one solution that works for all teams we are going to face, so there's always a possibility of getting it wrong at first, but having options available and a savvy manager means we can still get something out of those games as long as we stay in them. I think because the results have been so good, some forget quite how much upheaval there has been. We've been missing all of the players we played down our left-hand side last season, we've had to bed in a new center half without our main organiser in that back line. A lot of what we worked on during pre-season was lost with those key injuries and so we've had to adapt quickly. Had we had last year's defence in full to build with and then add to, maybe we'd be able to manage these heavy-pressing teams a bit better. We may already have the players to deal with or mitigate the problem, we just haven't been able to get them on the pitch. Emery demands improvement, in everything, all of the time, and it's fine for us fans to do the same, but it's not enough to just demand improvement, you have to know what to improve and how, anyone can keep shouting 'be better this' or 'do that better', that's the easy part. Finding solutions and implementing them is the difficult bit.

I'm all for wanting to find ways to improve etc. However, anyone who expects to go away to Spurs and not be under pressure for a long period, are being naive in my opinion. We had a game plan, I'm sure part of that would have included soaking up pressure, especially for parts of the first hour at least, just stay in the game. There is no team in history that has dominated every minute of every game they play, especially away from home, Man City, Liverpool, and Arsenal all have tricky periods in almost every game they play, maybe it's 10 minutes, maybe it's 20, maybe it's 45, there's always a spell where they don't have full control and have to defend. That's just football. I think we need to work on reducing how long that period of pressure can be sometimes, we can certainly improve, but it's easier against some teams than others. Were rode our luck no doubt, but we just needed to keep in touch, the Spurs gameplan was to blow us away early and kill the game and they created enough chances to do that, but they didn't take them, as soon as it got to half time, especially with the bonus of the equaliser, it was obvious we had more left in the tank as well as more options from the bench to change the game, I would not be surprised if that was part of the plan, to be in touch at half time with a stronger bench to call upon. It wasn't perfect, Emery wasn't happy, the halftime subs tell you that, issues needed correcting, but our manager is experienced and well-prepared for every possible eventuality. I think Emery is looking for more control in these games, for a few reasons, one is obviously the more of the game you control the more likely the result falls in your favour, but also the more you have control the less energy you use. I see teams like Spurs, Newcastle and Arsenal with this crazy intense press, trying to keep that going for 90 minutes every game is going to have an effect at the back end of the season, especially for those in Europe. This is where an experienced operator like Emery is being very clever I feel, our approach of keeping the ball, slowing games down for periods, and only expending explosive energy when the opportunity is there is very clever and long-term hopefully will benefit us in the business end of the season.

It's difficult to say really, all I know is we've used several different shades across the years, from almost purple to almost red and everything inbetween. As mentioned previously sometimes it can simply be the fabric we are using in the strips on any given year will show the colour differently to other years, or from print/screen point of views every time we swap design company they seem to want to change the colour. Much like the crest we've never really settled and stuck to very specific shades, even the blue has changed multiple times. It's all part of why we have such a poor brand, with logos/crests and colours constantly changing its impossible to have any consistency in what we do.

I would say, as somebody who works with colour on screens, that it's more important to get the fashion/kits colour correct first, and then get the print colour to match as closely as possible, and then screens are probably bottom in terms of importance when it comes to colour. This is because there are so many different types of screens with all kinds of different settings that can and are often changed, so no matter what colour you set everybody will be seeing a slightly different colour anyway due to the sheer number of variables at play. Obviously, you'd still try and match it as best as possible, and then be consistent when using it, but the colour should not start from somebody picking it on a screen in my opinion.

I'd be surprised if there was an official hex code back then, mainly because hex codes are a digital format for use on screens, though there may have been a CMYK colour for printed stuff. I believe for clothing/fashion they use a different colour format, and @NurembergVillanhas mentioned before it can be difficult to get some colours to match up with the digital/print colours as it depends on the ink, material, and other factors. You could try and take a hex colour from an image using a colour picker, however, the accuracy depends on how accurate the colours are in the image, again there can be a lot of factors at play in terms of lighting, if the image has been edited etc.

I would think, and I have nothing to back this up, that Emery wants to win the big one; he wants the Champions League on his CV. Elite managers are judged on how many they have. I think part of the reason he left Villareal for us, is that our owner's ambition matched his, that financially we'd back him more than Villareal, and give him whatever he wants to bring home that trophy. Now, I would imagine that if any massive club came in for him then he would consider it, and one of the main considerations would be 'Would I have a better chance of winning the Champions League there?' Don't get me wrong, there will be other factors, and I don't think he'd easily walk away from the project he's started here, I just get the impression he's fiercely ambitious and we'll need to keep up with that ambition if he's to remain here for a long time. Are Manchester United more likely to win the Champions League than us in their current condition? I don't know. They look a mess, but they still have plenty of good players there, and they have more FFP wiggle room than most due to massive income, so there's potential certainly. On the other side, they need a bigger culture change than we did, and that usually requires more player turnover, which inevitably takes longer, and time is not something easily afforded. So it wouldn't be a straightforward decision. Unai certainly backed himself to come in and improve us, I'm sure he'd back himself to improve them too. Hopefully, no decision will need to be made.

I'm not sure it's that easy, he may have been using other people's accounts to place bets (like his mothers possibly), or he may have multiple accounts in different names, or multiple devices others have access to who could have placed the bets, then you have VPNs that could mask where the bet was placed etc. The authorities have to request the data for all of this, and dodgy sites likely won't keep complete data, and then join up enough dots along with his financials to prove beyond doubt he placed a particular bet at a particular time on an account that is specifically his. I've no idea if he did or didn't do any of these things, as someone mentioned above, either he knows he's innocent or he's banking on the authorities not being able to prove beyond doubt he's done anything wrong.